On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 09:16:30AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 11:42:09PM +0200, Matt Kraai wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 09:15:01PM +0000, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 09:59:34PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote: > > > > - <dt><em>Non-US/Main</em> and <em>Non-US/Non-Free</em></dt> > > > > - <dd>These packages cannot be exported from the USA, they are mostly > > > > - encryption software packages, or software that is encumbered by > > > > - patent issues. Most of them are free, but some are non-free.</dd> > > > > + <dt><em>Non-US/Main</em></em></dt> > > > > + <dd>Packages in this area are free themselves but cannot be > > > > + stored on a server in the USA because they are encumbered by > > > > + patent issues.</dd> > > > > Things in main or non-US/main should not be patent encumbered. > > > non-US/main is designed so that packages can be imported into the US, > > > but not exported. If it would not fit the DFSG for any reason, including > > > being patent-encumbered in the US or other places, then it does not > > > belong in non-US/main. > > > What belongs in non-US/main? Only software left over from the > > crypto-in-main transition? > > There have, in practice, been packages relegated to non-US for purely > patent reasons. Whether these packages warrant the classification of > non-US/main or non-US/non-free is a bit of a judgement call. Since the > DFSG mainly talks about software licenses, I would question whether it's > appropriate to speak of patent-encumbered software as non-free when the > patent holder is not the author. Patented software does not have to be patent-encumbered (for example, we have many programs and libraries in both main and non-US/main that use CAST5 [0], which is patented). Patent-encumbered software would use things like LZW, which is non-free because of the licensing that is required to use it. CAST5's RFC [0] states: The CAST-128 cipher described in this document is available worldwide on a royalty-free basis for commercial and non-commercial uses. I'd further point out that packages relegated to non-US purely because of US patents are not usable in the US, which is something that traditionally non-US/main has been. Also, for example, if LZW had just a year left to expire on it in the US, instead of in Germany, would we relegate it to non-US/main? I hope not. [0] http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2144.txt -- Brian M. Carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx> 0x560553e7 "Let us think the unthinkable, let us do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all." --Douglas Adams
Attachment:
pgpR7Zji9kghD.pgp
Description: PGP signature